Okay.

But you really do not wish to take away my fondness for nooky would you?

I really cannot afford tax-tips so to speak!

What 'onerous' restrictions are you referring to on alcohol and smoking?

Warning labels on alcohol for pregnant women, no sale to minors who can easily get boos anyway, and those nanny state drunk driving laws?

No smoking anywhere anytime you want to light up is 'onerous'?

In this piece recommended by Arts & Letters Daily (covering among other things, the eating choices of the 19th-century working class and poor)

is as succinct a statement about one of the main problems of some liberal versions of nanny state as I've seen:

For all of his zeal in such matters, however, Bloomberg merely presents the most recent notable instance of what has been a longstanding tradition among the economic elite: the assumption that given a choice, poor people will always make the wrong one.

Lizzie Widicomb in the Talk of the Town section of the June 18 The New Yorker, wrote a short inspired by the proposed NYC soda restriction, titled "Fluid Ounces."

At the end she includes the opinion of Fran Lebowitz, caught "smoking a cigarette outside the Waverly Inn, where sodas are served in a highball glass."--

"These issues are class issues" she said of Bloomberg's soda scheme. She called the Mayor "the Monarch of Minutiae." "Soda is the recreation--the summer house--of the poor. It's an indulgence, and it's something they can indulge in." Speaking of the Mayor, she said,  "This man has eleven houses. That's the self-indulgence of a billionaire." She went on, "He's of the generation of Jewish men who fell that if they didn't become a doctor they are a failure. Now he's trying to become a doctor."

(No link; article available only to subscribers.)